Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TheOldBarn

A more sane approach to economics, and use of resource is sorely needed

Recommended Posts

One size does not fit all. I was listening to CSPAN's Washington Journal this AM. It's hard to listen to most days. I get up at 5 AM naturally and while getting readied for work I do an assortment of things. One of those things is to tune into the Washington Journal. A lot of people call in upset, you can really hear in their voices this magnified division that we seem to have in this nation of ours.

It's hard to listen to because a lot of callers are not well informed and yet over time you start to understand just a little bit about why they feel the way they do. 

Today the guest represented small business. Small business in the way of having no more than 10 -15 workers. It makes up a large part of the employment picture and it's important to note that what is a decent wage in say Alabama or Arkansas, just would in no way work in SF or in NY City. Not when we talk about a living wage. 

And this of course is true all over the world. 

 

If you sell your house in the Bay Area in California and move to Boise, the people in Boise resent you because you have a major purchasing power over what they have and they were born there, and so I agree in some way, how is that fair.

 

The same politician talking about workers rights for the entire nation does not sound the same to some as it might to others.

 

When we talk about climate change, we need to understand what it means to change the power grid from fossil fuel based energy to wind and solar. What about transmission lines from a windy part of the country to a more populated area? The technology is there, but what about the politics, what about the laws as they currently are built? 

 

When we talk about a minimum wage, while it is true that Federally mandated minimum wage laws are very much behind what they were in the 1960's, it's vital that we approach mandated minimum wage hikes in a sensible manner. Yes, that takes commitment and honest legislatures in each and every state.

 

What about the use of plastics - we have manufactured already way too much plastic. Everything is packaged in plastics that live forever. And it's a big job sorting these plastics that people discard on a daily basis. There are so many different kinds.

 

We have to get smarter. And we do need smart legislature's as well as smarter bureaucratic workers, as well as smarter companies all working together. And not just here in the US, but everywhere.

 

It's a daunting challenge. But on a positive note, it can be done. I mentioned the book Drawdown a few times before. It's a good place to start. I'd like to see a book like that as mandatory reading in high school and college courses as part of a civics curriculum.

 

Peace!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post.  Yes, we do face daunting challenges.

 

Reading history, and remembering when I was young, it seemed like every time a great challenge arose, there were great people who stepped up to save the day.   How awesome and lucky were we to have those great leaders?   It makes me wonder...where are our great leaders today?

 

In today's environment, I don't see how a great leader could ever emerge.  The media would not allow it.  They would immediately force a decision..."are you a D or an R?"   Once that choice was made, half the country would immediately set about destroying the great person's image.  Don't even think about saying "neither" or you'll face twice the opposition.

 

No person has lived a perfect life.  No person is good all the time or has all the right answers on every issue.  Even good acts can be portrayed as acts done for the wrong reasons.  And so, any person's ability to lead can be destroyed by our intrepid and partisan media.   

 

Even within a party, it's not going to be easy.  I'm not saying Joe Biden is a great leader.  But, have you noticed all the negative press he's gotten?  Our media so love a horse race that they will make sure enough negative coverage is broadcast that he doesn't run away with the nomination.  Otherwise, how would they sell papers and clicks and viewers?   They would treat anyone else the same.  If it was Bernie or Warren or Harris with a comfortable lead, you can bet their negative coverage would increase too.  

 

The media hates a hero.  They abhor anyone who is held up as an example for others.  The days are gone when they would cover for Roosevelt's legs or Kennedy's escapades.

 

Our next great leader will need to be extraordinary at a higher order of magnitude.  Yet, all we have available are flawed humans, no better at their core than you or me.  That's really all we ever had.  We just don't treat them as well as we used to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2019 at 8:33 PM, TheOldBarn said:

One size does not fit all. I was listening to CSPAN's Washington Journal this AM. It's hard to listen to most days. I get up at 5 AM naturally and while getting readied for work I do an assortment of things. One of those things is to tune into the Washington Journal. A lot of people call in upset, you can really hear in their voices this magnified division that we seem to have in this nation of ours.

It's hard to listen to because a lot of callers are not well informed and yet over time you start to understand just a little bit about why they feel the way they do. 

Today the guest represented small business. Small business in the way of having no more than 10 -15 workers. It makes up a large part of the employment picture and it's important to note that what is a decent wage in say Alabama or Arkansas, just would in no way work in SF or in NY City. Not when we talk about a living wage. 

And this of course is true all over the world. 

 

If you sell your house in the Bay Area in California and move to Boise, the people in Boise resent you because you have a major purchasing power over what they have and they were born there, and so I agree in some way, how is that fair.

 

The same politician talking about workers rights for the entire nation does not sound the same to some as it might to others.

 

When we talk about climate change, we need to understand what it means to change the power grid from fossil fuel based energy to wind and solar. What about transmission lines from a windy part of the country to a more populated area? The technology is there, but what about the politics, what about the laws as they currently are built? 

 

When we talk about a minimum wage, while it is true that Federally mandated minimum wage laws are very much behind what they were in the 1960's, it's vital that we approach mandated minimum wage hikes in a sensible manner. Yes, that takes commitment and honest legislatures in each and every state.

 

What about the use of plastics - we have manufactured already way too much plastic. Everything is packaged in plastics that live forever. And it's a big job sorting these plastics that people discard on a daily basis. There are so many different kinds.

 

We have to get smarter. And we do need smart legislature's as well as smarter bureaucratic workers, as well as smarter companies all working together. And not just here in the US, but everywhere.

 

It's a daunting challenge. But on a positive note, it can be done. I mentioned the book Drawdown a few times before. It's a good place to start. I'd like to see a book like that as mandatory reading in high school and college courses as part of a civics curriculum.

 

Peace!

 

 

I'm in the wrong place, and Bluedog is going to ban me, but I SALUTE YOU, Dem.  This was the old ways of doing things.  Thinking through, and trying to figure out, big problems.  But that's exactly what you just did in that post.  I'm a conservative, and I'm an environmental scientist.  I belong to no party.  The issues that you mention are BIG problems that need to be handled in a bi-partisan nature.  But neither party cares.  And your party with the SJWs (and mine with the Christian Conservatives) have been hijacked by politicians who are pushing that their most vocal members are the majority.  That's how you stay in power.  Let me be clear - if you want to stay in power (and money) you say "THIS is a big problem and this minority want to get you, elect me, and it'll be okay."  It's the late night infomercial approach.  Have problem with mold that's going to poison your bathtub?  Buy the MEGAMOP!  Is that clear?  Am I making sense?

 

Either way, thanks for the post - I lack hope for this country these days, and posts like this make me happy.  Here, have some Billy Joel and have a great weekend, friend:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/23/2019 at 6:47 PM, Crom33 said:

I'm in the wrong place, and Bluedog is going to ban me, but I SALUTE YOU, Dem.  This was the old ways of doing things.  Thinking through, and trying to figure out, big problems.  But that's exactly what you just did in that post.  I'm a conservative, and I'm an environmental scientist.  I belong to no party.  The issues that you mention are BIG problems that need to be handled in a bi-partisan nature.  But neither party cares.  And your party with the SJWs (and mine with the Christian Conservatives) have been hijacked by politicians who are pushing that their most vocal members are the majority.  That's how you stay in power.  Let me be clear - if you want to stay in power (and money) you say "THIS is a big problem and this minority want to get you, elect me, and it'll be okay."  It's the late night infomercial approach.  Have problem with mold that's going to poison your bathtub?  Buy the MEGAMOP!  Is that clear?  Am I making sense?

 

Either way, thanks for the post - I lack hope for this country these days, and posts like this make me happy.  Here, have some Billy Joel and have a great weekend, friend:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am not a Democrat. When I was confronted with the decision to register my vote I was a bit perplexed at the time. This was way before the internet took hold. I was a simplistic 18 year old in 1979. I liked math, and I liked statistics, but I also felt discouraged about how politicians couldn't bring themselves to simply talk about the facts at hand.

Now, I am what most people call liberal. But then again, I'm sort of conservative as well. 

 

I don't see the Federal debt we now have as a problem in the intermediate future. But at the same time, waste is waste. How much fresh water does the Earth hold, how much 

energy does it take to recycle light metals like aluminum. Why does a poor country sell off all of their resources, and remain poor. Who is the middle man, who is it that gets richer

still by building slum apartment dwellings where they have horrible schools and instead of doing a darn thing about it, we build more prisons - privately owned prisons no less. 

Same thing with military spending. How much is enough to spend to create a defense to protect the homeland? Do we need to sell arms all over the globe, and doesn't that just help

despots who never seem to give a darn about their own create more turmoil in the end?

 

Nothing's black and white. I have heard real scientist on the left and right agree that to be true. There's a difference between being a scientist and an engineer. Neither one is bad - I like this paragraph I read from a excerpt of a new book, the economist hour, regarding supply-side economics.

 

"Another of the colorful characters who populate “The Economists’ Hour” is Robert Mundell. Appelbaum credits him with providing the theoretical underpinnings of the idea of a single currency—making him in effect the intellectual father of the euro—and of supply-side economics. In the late sixties, convinced that inflation was heading upward, Mundell bought a run-down fifteenth-century palazzo in the Tuscan countryside for ten thousand dollars. He turned out to be right about inflation, and later claimed to have multiplied his investment a hundredfold. Yet, three decades later, when he won the Nobel Prize in Economics, he was still shovelling cash into his Italian money pit."

The punchline here is... wait for it, Supply-side Economics. It's funny because his bet on inflation turns out became a money pit.

The village was always there. He bought a building that was hundreds of years old cheap, betting on inflation. It's about utility of forethought. Some would say, the angle of repose, in geological terminology. 

 

Sure, we've all been there before, if we've lived long enough, and hopefully learned from our own mistakes.

 

Peace!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...